WaPo: Is “Fortnight for Freedom” a covert Catholic effort to unseat Obama?

posted at 2:41 pm on June 8, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Melinda Henneberger certainly thinks so. My friend and fellow Catholic wonders in her She the People post what it would take to get the IRS to strip the Catholic Church of its tax-exempt status for politicking in presidential elections, and sees the “Fortnight for Freedom” campaign in two weeks as a legitimate reason to do so (via Deacon Greg):

Surely if the church ran a massive PR campaign just ahead of a national election, calling for widespread civil disobedience and reading letters about it from pulpits across the nation, that would cross the line into campaigning?

Ixnay on that, too, because the “Fortnight for Freedom” set to run from June 21-July 4th, is just such an effort.

Just the other night on Twitter, the Archdiocese of Washington tweeted several messages that struck me as partisan: “Unconscionable #HHSMandate #Obamacare set to trample sanctity of human life,” said one of them, sent on June 5th.

In a press release, the bishops compared themselves to Martin Luther King writing his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” and a priest in San Francisco called this “our Rosa Parks moment.’’

But that was nothing; a frend in Pennsylvania told me he recently heard a homily drawing parallels between the Catholic Church in 2012 under Obama and the persecution of Catholics in Mexico under Plutarco Calles, who between 1926 and 1929 systematically razed churches and executed priests.

In response, I’d ask Melinda this question: Who picked this fight? It certainly wasn’t the Catholic bishops, who tried working with Barack Obama in crafting the scope of the religious exemption to the HHS contraception mandate. They didn’t pick the timing, either. It was Obama and Kathleen Sebelius who decided to promulgate a new rule in an election year that claimed the authority to define religious practice as restricted to only what happens inside a church.

Here’s another question: why would the USCCB want to unseat Obama at all, absent this attack on religious expression? Although the bishops ended up opposing ObamaCare because of insufficient bars on abortion, their policy positions align more with liberals than conservatives. Until the HHS mandate, the bishops wouldn’t have had anything to say at all about the federal government’s actions during Obama’s term.

And yet another question: Since when does tax-exempt status mean forfeiting First Amendment rights on issues? This ruling directly impacts the Catholic Church and other faith organizations and threatens their efforts to serve the community. The bishops have the right to speak out against government action, especially that which tramples on religious expression and arrogates to government the ability to define and curb it. While some of the debate has been hyperbolic, that doesn’t mean that religious leaders should be threatened with silence or told that protesting unconstitutional incursions on religious liberty is somehow subversive and unethical. This protest isn’t aimed at some unrelated, esoteric policy decision or candidacy, but an attempt to impose regulation that would force churches to violate their own doctrines or hide inside their churches.

If the churches don’t fight that kind of regulation, which even Henneberger calls “problematic,” who will?

Nancy Pelosi might define her religion as what she does inside a church on Sunday. That’s her right, even if I disagree. The government has no right or authority to impose that definition on the rest of us. If Barack Obama chose to make that attempt ten months before an election, that doesn’t mean that religious leaders of any faith have an obligation to be silent about it until December.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Didn’t I just hear that Holder was giving speeches in black churches? How long have politicians been doing this? As long as I can remember, and nothing is ever said about it. Only when the speech goes against the liberals is this separation important.

Every Catholic, every Christian and every patriotic American should be working tirelessly to unseat obama – obama’s war on the Catholic Church, Christianity and America must end, and it is up to us to end it.

There’s nothing in the IRS code that prohibits tax exempt Churches from taking vocal positions on political issues. They are (supposedly) only prohibited from endorsing one specific candidate by name over another. And even that regulation is clearly unconstitutional which is why the IRS has NEVER taken the issue to Court. They always back down and dismiss. They know how the courts would rule.

I say yes to both and pray that the former not the latter comes to fruition.

reddevil on June 8, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Took the words out of my mouth. The Catholic Church has woken up to the fact that their socialist buddies have betrayed them, and may even start actively persecuting them. And having the Coward-in-Chief removed peacefully is the best option. The others quickly get ugly, and mostly for them.

If we are betting on the outcome, I am going to choose the Catholic Church.

If we are judging how dumb the strategy of attacking the Church is, in the run up to a major election….This looks like just one more in a long line of bad pieces of advice provided by Valerie Jarrett. Now all the usual suspects are trying to apply lipstick to that pig of a bad ploy.

Took the words out of my mouth. The Catholic Church has woken up to the fact that their socialist buddies have betrayed them, and may even start actively persecuting them.

MelonCollie on June 8, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Dont be so sure about that. The Catholic Church is a very unreliable supporter of limited government. As soon as the mandate is off the table they will go back to normal, back to cuddling Democrats again.

elinda Henneberger? (whoever?)and her ilk, needs to be informed that the Catholic Church has been around a hell of lot longer than the IRS, and no matter what befalls the IRS, the Catholic Church will remain true to its believes and outlast them all. True believers will see to it !!

Keep talking, lefties! Even non-practicing and “lapsed” Catholics and other religious beliefs are noticing the willingness – even eagerness – to intrude.

Of course, the Bishops are as self-serving as ever, and only want an exemption for “religious institutions,” leaving lay businessmen at the mercy of federal whims. If the rule is wrong, it is wrong and should be repealed completely.

If the Democrats want to talk separation of church and state, by all means let’s do it. Keep the state out of the church’s affairs, and the church will likely keep out of politics.

It’s the same way with lobbyists–take the politics out of money (i.e. remove the government’s ability to mess with the economy) and you’ll take the money out of politics (because there will be nothing to gain through lobbying).

We have entered the “take away their freedom” stage of Obama hope and change. The army he has chosen is the IRS -uncontrollable by congress, now enforcing healthcare and about ready to put on their jackboots.Did we not read of their ordering mucho rounds of anmmunition?

Where is the GOP opposition to the missuse of this unconstitution al agency?

And yet another question: Since when does tax-exempt status mean forfeiting First Amendment rights on issues?

It doesn’t. The writer of that article didn’t want to do the necessary digging. A tax-exempt organization may take on public polic issues, even ones that are divisive.

Section 501(c)(3) organizations may take positions on public policy issues, including issues that divide candidates in an election for public office. However, section 501(c)(3) organizations must avoid any issue advocacy that functions as political campaign intervention. Even if a statement does not expressly tell an audience to vote for or against a specific candidate, an organization delivering the statement is at risk of violating the political campaign intervention prohibition if there is any message favoring or opposing a candidate.

They never say vote against Obama, they talk about his policy in the HHS mandate. His name being attached to the legislation just makes some see that it is a partisan issue, going after his campaign. That is not the case.

Hey Catholic church… time to clean house and start with poohlosi. She worships alright but not the same God us far right lunatic Christians do….maybe a unicorn or a moonbeam god or just at the altar of do your own thing

That’s WIsconsin at national scale :)… They picked a loosing fight and now they are whining pre-emptively, ’tis the money’, ‘the BIshops do not speak for the Ctaholic church ‘(NAncy P), their rescind their tax exemption status.’…. Blah, blah….the Left is coming undone at the seams…and it is such a joy to watch this spectacle…

I went to the USCCB’s website and found the webpage for the event. I did not visit every link for every Diocese on the list but the couple that I did planned a few extra worship services for the period in question and asked for the Rosary to be prayed after each service.

Is that now some sort of offense against state now that the Lightbringer is in charge? Dr King is damn lucky Obama wasn’t President during the Civil Rights marches then.

Surely if the church ran a massive PR campaign just ahead of a national election, calling for widespread civil disobedience and reading letters about it from pulpits across the nation, that would cross the line into campaigning?

Yeah, ‘cuz black churches never do that.

Anyhoo, the law prevents churches from endorsing or speaking out against specific politicians not laws or policies.

Does the government want the Catholic Church to STFU about helping the poor, illegal immigration, etc.?

I hope the Catholic community actually does the right thing and helps rid the country of Obama; but with all due respect, the Catholic community helped elect Obama in the first place. For that reason they have more responsibility than some of us to step up to the plate and fix this mess. They’ve been literally dancing with the devil in the political sense and now they seem surprised to find out the devil is still evil.

Kind of like going into a biker bar alone and announcing you’re there to kick everybody’s azz.

antipc on June 8, 2012 at 2:52 PM

More like walking into a biker bar alone wearing mom’s jeans and a goofy bicycle helmet and announcing that you’ve come to be their leader/messiah. And if they don’t worship you immediately with words of praise and a Nobel Peace Prize, then you’ll kick all their behinds.

This is so stupid on the Libs side. Taking away the Catholic Church’s tax exempt status — or even threatening to do so – will bring out EVERY tax exempt religious institution for Mitt.

Maybe if they had done it in the first year Obama was POTUS it might have played better because people, except Catholics, would have had time to forget the pain. But with less than 5 months left before the election — no way no how.

Oh what a disgrace if such a despicable and base man, who hates America and it’s constitution and all Christians, and worships himself, should be allowed to assault a people which has the faith of omnipotent God! With what reproaches will the Lord overwhelm us if we do not promptly and fully aid those who’s conscience is being brutalized and murdered because they profess the Roman Catholic religion! Let those who have been accustomed unjustly to wage private warfare against other of the faithful now all unite and go against the tyrant in a Holy Crusade and end with total victory in November!

Let those who have been in service of this tyrant against their own brothers and sisters now fight in a proper way against this tyrant. Let those who have been wearing themselves out in both body and soul in vain attempt to appease him now labor for glorious honor against him. Behold! On the one side will be the completely destroyed tyrant, on the other the fierce and righteous protectors of the Constitution and Christianity. On the one side will be the destroyed enemy of the Lord, on the other, his friends who will shout at the tyrant as they destroy him in November, “It is for the Founding Fathers!”, “It is for the Founding Fathers!, and “It is the will of God! It is the will of God! It is the will of God!”

I’m organizing the events at our Parish and there is *nothing* that indicates support for one candidate over another. The goal is a) awareness of the value of religious freedom and b) a prayerful campaign to ensure that we in the US are able to hold on to our religious freedom and c) to pray for those around the world who aren’t as fortunate as we are and are being injured and killed for being Christians.

Someone else pointed out that Holder has been making speeches to black Church leaders about their ‘right to vote’. So its okay for him to do that – but not okay for Catholics to make their parishioners aware of their right to religious freedom?

The answer I want to know is: will Roman Catholic bishops endorse Romney for the presidency, openly and as recognition that the Øbama presidency has been a disaster for Catholics, non-Catholics and Democrats as well as for everyone else?
.
Will they ignore his Mormon roots and accept his belief in Christ in order to remove the obstinate, ineffectual, narcissistic Complainer-in-Chief?

Once again -the Catholic Church (note I did not say the USCCB which has no hierarchal authority, or some Notre Dame theologian, or Nancy Pelosi, or Obama’s cool Jesuit Chicago priest)holds to the principle of subsidiarity,whereby Caesar (the state) becomes the last resort in who is responsible for social issues, and needs to remove itself from our business that we must handle.

Furthermore, the Church holds the right to own property (no charity is possible without this.

The Church holds that the business of immigration belongs to the moral decisions of the laity.

The Church holds that we have a right (and an obligation to preserve and protect ourselves) it’s called defense -a legitimate war (just) may sometimes be a necessary lesser evil.

The Church holds that all lying (political spin)is evil.
the Church holds that envy (soak the rich) is evil.

You can’t get much more conservative, yet fiscal conseervative hurl spittle and loathe what they euphamistically call -social conservatives -when it is they who hold the storng conservative values.

Any of us sitting in the pews recognized that many churches were alternately preaching the socialist “gospel” over the years. They somewhat surreptitiously have tried to tell us if our Lord and Savior were here today- he’d be a Democrat.

Where were you then with these protestations?

Ah, yes. That’s different- I know.

Now, the same people with whom some have formed this unholy alliance are seeking to take away a fundamental pillar of the American church, the aggrieved protest and Melinda doesn’t like it?

Well I suppose we are in a agreement that religion should be bereft of politics. All politics, not just the ones which don’t comport with people like Melinda’s whimsical, parochial inclinations.

But this fight isn’t about that. It is about the fundamental precepts of the church based on our Lord’s teachings, our constitutional right to practice them freely and our very unique existence as Christians.

If there every was a time the church should organize and speak out- it is now. For what will be left if they don’t, will not resemble and true House of the Lord.

The answer I want to know is: will Roman Catholic bishops endorse Romney for the presidency, openly and as recognition that the Øbama presidency has been a disaster for Catholics, non-Catholics and Democrats as well as for everyone else?

ExpressoBold on June 8, 2012 at 4:38 PM

That is the one thing they will never do–endorse a candidate and the Church will be stripped of tax-exempt status as soon as you can say “ACLU.”

Which isn’t to say that they can’t make their position on any law or issue clear from the pulpit. First Amendment.

In a press release, the bishops compared themselves to Martin Luther King writing his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” and a priest in San Francisco called this “our Rosa Parks moment.’’

I see what they are trying to do by equating these actions with an extension of the civil rights movement but it just isn’t accurate. This is more away the German National Socialists took over the Protestant churches and corrupted them to include turning the church’s youth programs over to the Hitler Youth. Catholics vis-a-vis the Pope cut a seperate deal.

The Democratic party has had a majority of the catholic vote for so long that they think they will always have the way they do the African American vote. here is the problem. Catholics are generally speaking highly educated thanks to their schools and university system. Eventually if you keep kicking them they will kick back. When that happens they will lose it for a long time.

It was already happening before this. More and more of my fellow regularly attending Catholic friends were voting republican. Now even some of the staunch dems are looking at voting the one out of office.

It must be said that the RCC Bishops did a lot to bring themselves to this pass. They have supported government actions in so many things it boggles the mind. Now that it comes around to bite them in seat of their Cassocks, they whine about it.

I agree that the mandate which they complain about is a serious breach. The Bishops need to realize that such things are part of the package when you involved government, particularly when you support secular government doing things the Church should be doing in the first place. If it didn’t affect us all I’d tell them to “cry me a river.”

This is so stupid on the Libs side. Taking away the Catholic Church’s tax exempt status — or even threatening to do so – will bring out EVERY tax exempt religious institution for Mitt.

talking_mouse on June 8, 2012 at 3:54 PM

The attempt to take away religious tax exemptions has already begun in California.

See today’s news:

A proposal to eliminate churches’ property tax exemptions in California has been cleared to collect signatures.

The item needs 807,615 signatures by November in order to make it on the ballot. If passed by voters, it would eliminate property tax exemptions on buildings used for worship or religious purposes on Jan. 1, 2013.

It was Obama and Kathleen Sebelius who decided to promulgate a new rule in an election year that claimed the authority to define religious practice as restricted to only what THEY IMAGINE happens inside a church.

(Corrected quote to reflect the fact that the Obamacrats have no idea or understanding about what happens inside a real church)

Obama picked a foolish fight. Even an armored battalion looks puny against tens of millions of citizens with pitchforks!!! This is why, in the modern world where it is impossible to prevent communication, all forms of government ultimately require consent of the governed.